Skip to content

Obama’s Deficit Commission Will Recommend Social Security Benefit Cuts

Obama’s Deficit Commission Will Recommend Social Security Benefit Cuts

September 19, 2010 SVadmin Comments 1 comment

President Obama’s Deficit Reduction Commission, according to Glenn Greenwald and a growing chorus of commentators, will recommend cuts in Social Security benefits, even though such cuts will have little effect on the deficit. In a recent interview with Robert McChesney, Greenwald said that the plan to cut Social Security benefits is an “open secret” in Washington.

The plan is for the commission to return its recommendation after the midterm election, when a lame-duck Congress could enact legislation to implement benefit cuts, far enough ahead of the next election so that there will be time for the uproar to die down. With the commission meeting in secret, public discourse on such cuts is effectively precluded prior to the midterm.

Jane Hamsher says that “President Obama has packed the Debt Commission (also known as the cat food commission) with members who have an overwhelming history of support for both benefit cuts and privatization of Social Security.” (See chart of membership here).

Hamsher says:

“What Wall Street wants is to wind up with a good chunk of the Social Security trust fund in its own coffers. Where that intersects with the objectives of the commission remains to be seen, but the fact is that Obama has packed it with people who have a strong history of supporting both reducing benefits and privatization. Even the token “liberals” like Jan Schakowsky have a history of abandoning their strongest principles when the President asks it of them, and Dick Durbin is now telling “bleeding heart liberals” to be open to benefit cuts for the sake of the fiscal responsibility.”

Economist James Galbraith addressed the Deficit Commission in June, and chided them in the bluntest possible language:

“Your proceedings are clouded by illegitimacy.  In this respect, there are four major issues.

“First, most of your meetings are secret, apart from two open sessions before this one, which were plainly for show.  There is no justification for secret meetings on deficit reduction. No secrets of any kind are involved. Nothing you say will affect financial markets. Congress long ago — in 1975 — reformed its procedures to hold far more sensitive and complicated meetings, notably legislative markups, in the broad light of day.

“Secrecy breeds suspicion: first, that your discussions are at a level of discourse so low that you feel it would be embarrassing to disclose them.  Second, that some members of the commission are proceeding from fixed, predetermined agendas.  Third, that the purpose of the secrecy is to defer public discussion of cuts in Social Security and Medicare until after the 2010 elections.  You could easily dispel these suspicions by publishing video transcripts of all of your meetings on the Internet, and by holding all future meetings in public.  Please do so.

“Second, there is a question of leadership.  A bipartisan commission should approach its task in a judicious, open-minded and dispassionate way.  For this, the attitude and temperament of the leadership are critical.

“I first met Senator Simpson when we were both on Capitol Hill; at Harvard he became friends with my late parents.  He is admirably frank in his views.  But Senator Simpson has plainly shown that he lacks the temperament to do a fair and impartial job on this commission.  This is very clear from the abusive response he made recently to Alex Lawson of Social Security Works, who was asking important questions about the substance of the commission’s work, as well as calling attention to the illegitimate secrecy under which you are operating.

“A general cannot speak of the President with contempt.  Likewise the leader of a commission intended to sway the public cannot display contempt for the public.  With due respect, Senator Simpson’s conduct fails that test.

“Third, most members of the Commission are political leaders, not economists.  With all respect for Alice Rivlin, with just one economist on board you are denied access to the professional arguments surrounding this highly controversial issue.  In general, it is impossible to have a fair discussion of any important question when the professional participants in that discussion have been picked, in advance, to represent a single point of view.

“Conflicts of interest constitute the fourth major problem.  The fact that the Commission has accepted support from Peter G. Peterson, a man who has for decades conducted a relentless campaign to cut Social Security and Medicare, raises the most serious questions.  Quite apart from the merits of Mr. Peterson’s arguments, this act must be condemned.  A Commission serving public purpose cannot accept funds or other help from a private party with a strong interest in the outcome of that Commission’s work.  Your having done so is a disgrace.”

Galbraith concludes:

” … if cuts are proposed and enacted in Social Security and Medicare, they will hurt millions, weaken the economy, and the deficits will not decline. It’s a lose-lose proposition, with no gainers except a few predatory funds, insurance companies, and such who would profit, for some time, from a chaotic private marketplace.”

Just to emphasize the seriousness of what’s at stake, here’s a graph from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:

Click for more information


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Blog, Economics, Politics

Post navigation

PREVIOUS
England’s National Theatre Live in Grass Valley!
NEXT
APPLE Sustainability Center: Fall Discussion Series

Join Our Mailing List

One thought on “Obama’s Deficit Commission Will Recommend Social Security Benefit Cuts”

  1. Jody Beck-Ball says:
    September 30, 2010 at 11:26 pm

    I feel that the most reasonable cuts in social security should be made only for people who do not need social security. I know many wealthy, retired, men and women who reguard these benefits as rather worthless. The amount of money does not make much of an increase in their income and actually some ask why the government sends people like then money. Those who are wealthy should not receive social security. Perhaps giving them a choice to forfit the benefits would work. Then there would be no reason to cut the barely survivalable amount of money that is sent to people who have no other retirement income resources.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

DONATE TO THE FOOD BANK OF NEVADA COUNTY

(CLICK IMAGE)

DONATE TO NEVADA COUNTY RELIEF FUND (click image below)

Erika Lewis, Shaye Cohn, Craig Flory – Got A Mind To Ramble

Jack Kornfield: A Steady Heart in Time of Corona Virus (Part I)

Tara Brach: A Steady Heart in Time of Corona Virus (Part II)

Subscribe to Sierra Voices Journal

Recent Posts

  • How Much Better Off Would America Be if 6 Republican Presidents Hadn’t Stolen the White House?
  • Timothy Snyder: “It was clear to me in October that Trump’s behavior presaged a coup, and I said so in print”
  • The Most Urgent Issue in U.S. Politics is Not Biden or Trump, Not Who is President This Time
  • How can America heal from the Trump era? Lessons from Germany’s transformation into a prosperous democracy after Nazi rule
  • We Need More in Congress Like Jamie Raskin

Recent Comments

  • Douglas Keachie on The Most Urgent Issue in U.S. Politics is Not Biden or Trump, Not Who is President This Time
  • The Most Important Issue in US Politics is Not Biden or Trump, or Even Who is President This Time on How to stop an Insurrection Caucus: These reforms could reduce GOP extremism and save our democracy
  • (Posted by) Don Pelton on GOP Warns Dems About Court Packing (Cartoon)
  • Criminal Incompetence, Malignant Ignorance Will Lead to Hunger and Violence on A Nice Depression Now Benefits the GOP in 2022 and 2024
  • togel singapura hari ini on How Wall Street Has Turned Housing Into a Dangerous Get-Rich-Quick Scheme — Again

Archives

  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • November 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • December 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Aging
  • Articles
  • Atlas Obscura
  • Authoritarianism
  • Black Lives
  • Black Lives Matter
  • Blog
  • Buddhism
  • Cartoon
  • Climate Change
  • Constitution
  • Corona Virus
  • Corruption
  • Depression
  • Disenfranchisement
  • Economics
  • Education
  • Election Fraud
  • Environment
  • Farming
  • Fascism
  • Fire!
  • Food Insecurity
  • Foreign Policy
  • Forest Management
  • Gender
  • Health Care
  • History
  • Humor
  • Hunger
  • Ignorance
  • Labor
  • Local
  • Masks
  • Medical Care
  • Men
  • Mental Health
  • Middle Class
  • Mining
  • MMT
  • Modern Monetary Theory
  • Music
  • Native Americans
  • Pandemic
  • Parenting
  • Poetry
  • Police
  • Politics
  • Press
  • Race
  • Reviews
  • Revolution
  • Right-wing terrorism
  • Russiagate
  • Science
  • Technology
  • Trump Virus
  • Tyranny
  • Uncategorized
  • Voting
  • War
  • War on Government
  • Water
  • Watersheds
  • Wildfires

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
© 2021   All Rights Reserved.